Evaluation guidelines
Evaluation Guidelines
Failure to comply with the formal guidelines or disengagement from the dossier's topic are grounds for refusal in limine of the submitted material.
All texts submitted to the journal, without exception, will be evaluated by two reviewers external to the Editorial Board and the Editorial Team, maintaining mutual anonymity or double blind. In case of divergence, a third reviewer is consulted.
- The reviewers are selected according to their specialty, based on the analysis of their CVs in the Lattes database.
- Material submitted by an author linked to an institution cannot be evaluated by a referee linked to the same institution (Unicamp article cannot be evaluated by a referee linked to Unicamp, for example).
- A reviewer will evaluate no more than two different papers to any CFP.
Submitted contributions are evaluated primarily considering the following aspects:
- problem importance
- contribution to field studies
- theme update
- respect for the state of the art
- originality of content
- discussion context domain
- theoretical foundation
- clarity of purpose
- coherence and relevance of the argument
- text structure and organization
- language and writing quality
- relationship between abstract and article
- keyword suitability
- consistency and timeliness of the bibliography used
Based on the considerations made by the external reviewers, the editors verify the fidelity of the opinion in relation to the proposed article and then decide on the publication of the article.
The evaluation process, starting from the deadline for submission of each call, until the final decision on publication lasts an average of 5 (five) months, depending on the volume of articles under evaluation and the availability of reviewers .
